19/20
Note from the editors As our time on the Science and Engineering Committee drew to a close last year, we found ourselves yearning to create something that would have a lasting impact on the HABS community. In a flash, lightning struck, and in that moment we realised that the conception of a Science and Engineering magazine was our new purpose. Its name: SPARK. While this has been nothing short of a lengthy, and at times, arduous process, we can finally say that we have created a publication that we are proud to put our names on. The quality and diversity of the articles that we received were all of a high calibre. We immensely enjoyed reading them and we believe that there is something to be gained from students in all years taking the time to read them. Thank you to our editors, those who submitted articles and photos and everyone else who has made this publication possible. Happy reading! Deborah and Emike
Head Editors: Deborah Smith (U6 TXD), Emike Akagbosu (U6 JHB) Editors: Elisa Earle (U6 DHH), Aishwarya Shah (U6 DHH), Amba Sharma (U6 IEF), ,Neeraja Suresh (U6 SN)
Contents 1
How do we benefit from the microorganisms that live within us? Nancy Stitt, U6 JHB
4
Journey of a Red Blood Cell Simi Joshi, U4 Aesc
5
Life cycle of a plastic bottle Harnee Jeyaseelan, U4 Alpha
7
United Space School at NASA Tori Weston, U6 TXD
9
The Ethics of Human-Animal Embryos Shalini Sellam, U5 Aleph
11
The genetic breakthrough of CRISPR-how it has the potential to change humanity forever Mathujana Thirunavukkarasu, U5 A
13 15
STEM Enrichment Placebos- A Violation of Trust? Sarannia Ragulan, U5 Aleph
17
The Problem with Anti-Vaxxers
Ella Broomberg, U6 DT
20
Visit to the UCLO in Mill Hill Emma Bernholt, U4 Aesc
21
Autonomous Vehicles Helena Loan, U6 AHS
23 26
Photo entry comp Quiz/crossword
How do we benefit from the microorganisms that live within us? By Nancy Stitt, U6 JHB Our bodies are an ecosystem of trillions of microorganisms that live within us: science calls it our “microbiome”. We consist of approximately 10 trillion human cells, but inside us we harbour as many as 100 trillion microbial cells. We are vastly outnumbered by our microbial companions, but how is this beneficial to us? We are only beginning fully to understand our complex and crucial relationship with our microbiome, but already there has been significant progress, especially in the fields of obesity, immunity, digestion and mental health. We benefit from our mother’s internal microorganisms at the very beginning of life. As a foetus, we are encased in an amniotic sac and muscly uterus that prevents us from coming into contact with a single microbe. We will never again be so safe from infection. However, as soon as there is a break in the amniotic sac, colonisation begins. While 100% of the cells that make us up when we start life are human cells, we are soon colonised by so many microbes, that by the age of 3, only 10% of our cells are human - microorganisms account for the other 90%. If you are born vaginally, the first bacteria that you come into contact with are your mother’s vaginal flora. This useful layer of bacteria coats the sterile body of the baby as it is born and is absorbed into its stomach, where it produces lactic acid, preventing our large intestine from being colonized by harmful bacteria, and promoting good gut health. Breastfeeding also provides us with microorganisms that populate our gut. Colonising our gut so early, these can be crucially important in the development of later bodily functions, like the immune or metabolic systems. Children who have not been breast fed may have insufficient Bifidobacteria in their gut in their first year, which shockingly increases their risk of obesity in later life.
1
The microorganisms that live within us also benefit our immune system, 80% of which is located in the gut. The majority of microbes in our gut protect us by simply occupying spaces that would otherwise be free for harmful bacteria to colonise. Some of these microorganisms release compounds that decrease inflammation, keeping beneficial microbes safe by blocking attack from our immune system. A study showed that people with less inflammation have a lower risk for cancer. Our digestive system also benefits from the microorganisms that live within us. Our gastrointestinal tract contains over a thousand different species of bacteria, in addition to minority populations of viruses, yeasts and fungi. These microbes increase the value of our food by releasing nutrients that would otherwise be undigested; up to 10% of the calories we absorb from food are made available by microbes.
We often say phrases like “I have a gut feeling” or “I have butterflies in my stomach”, but may not realise that our gut microbiota may actually be affecting and even benefitting our mental health. We also benefit from our internal microorganisms mentally. Our microbes produce compounds which signal brain cells to divide and are thought to be so important for learning in developing brains, that they are often added to baby formula. Our gut is surrounded by 500 million neurones, which can sometimes be called ‘the second brain’. Information is mainly transmitted between the gut and the brain through the vagus nerve, which reaches certain areas of the brain associated with emotion, motivation, memory and morality. This suggests that the health of our gut and its microbes may have a certain influence over our mental wellbeing. We often say phrases like “I have a gut feeling” or “I have butterflies in my stomach”, but may not realise that our gut microbiota may actually be affecting and even benefitting our mental health.
2
As our understanding of the relationship between our bodies and our microbiome increases, our ability to diagnose and treat diseases will also develop. One exciting treatment that has developed from research into our microbiome is for the disease commonly known as C diff, a serious condition that causes patients to suffer from frequent bouts of diarrhoea. A 21-month old Hispanic girl with recurrent Clostridium difficile infection suffered for a whole year without an effective treatment, but amazingly, after a ‘maternal donor faecal microbiota transplantation was performed’, her symptoms cleared up, and she has been free of the disease for the past 5 years. In future, this way of harnessing our microbes may lead to increased use of probiotics to regain a healthy microbiome, better diagnosing of disease, the creation of personalised diets, and may even play an important role in a whole new era of personalised medicine. We can be sure that exciting progress lies ahead in understanding the beneficial link between our microbiota and our wellbeing. Microbes are not our enemies, but our healthgiving friends!
Bacteria in the gut
3
Journey of a Red Blood Cell By Simi Joshi, U4 Aesc Red blood cells are cellular components of blood. There are millions of them in the human body, and their main purpose is to carry oxygen from the lungs to tissues throughout the body. They also carry carbon dioxide to the lungs to be exhaled. Red blood cells are found in your blood and travel through the circulatory system. The circulatory system is an organ system that permits blood to circulate and transport nutrients, oxygen, carbon dioxide and blood cells to and from the cells in the body. The journey begins when the red blood cell is created in the bone marrow - a soft sponge-like substance found in the centre of some bones. The cell develops for 25 days until it starts travelling to the heart via capillaries. At this stage, the cell is deoxygenated. The cell then makes its way to the heart and is pushed into the right atrium. The right atrium then contracts, pushing the blood cell into the right ventricle which contracts, pushing the red blood cell out of the heart.
The journey of a red blood cell is an extremely important process because it provides us with oxygen. After leaving the heart, the red blood cell travels through the pulmonary artery to the lungs. There, it picks up oxygen to oxygenate the blood. The oxygenated blood cell makes it way back to the heart via the pulmonary vein into the left atrium. After entering the left atrium, the red blood cell enters the left ventricle. The left ventricle then contracts, pushing the red blood cell out of the heart into the aorta. The aorta is the body’s largest artery. Travelling through the aorta, the red blood cell goes into the lower limbs, delivering oxygen and blood around the body. Red blood cells typically last for 120 days before they die - their journey ends here. Although the journey of a red blood cell may seem like a lengthy process, it only takes approximately one minute depending on the individual’s heart rate.
4
The journey of a red blood cell is an extremely important process because it provides us with oxygen. In one minute, the average person will pump almost all the blood (5 litres) around their body. In one speck of blood, there are around five million red blood cells. Altogether, an average sized adult has approximately seven hundred trillion red blood cells in their body.
Life cycle of a plastic bottle By Harnee Jeyaseelan, U4 Alpha The life cycle of a water bottle - have you ever pondered on this before? Well, you might already know what a life cycle is - a series of ordered events happening to a living organism - however you wouldn’t really think of a water bottle as something that has a journey, but it does. For you, your vision of a water bottle is probably just buying it from a shop, drinking from it, then hopefully recycling it, but really there is a lot more than that. Such as, where does the bottle come from in the first place? What happens to it after it has been recycled if at all? The whole journey starts off when crude oil is extracted from the soil. This is done by having it pumped out from wells that have been dug into the soil. A lot of oil is needed for the making of plastic bottles as they are consumed so much. Evidence shows that in 2006, 17 million barrels of oil were needed to make plastic bottles in America. I’m sure you can imagine how much work would have to go into extracting all this oil each year! The oil then still needs to be cleaned
Evidence shows that an average American uses 167 plastic water bottles per year! at the refinery, so that it is healthy to use for plastic and so that it is strong. Then after the oil is all clean, it can be made into plastic pellets (tiny pieces of plastic) in factories and then changed into bottle preforms (small plastic tubes).
5
These preforms are then heated up and shaped into lots of the plastic bottles we use. Evidence shows that an average American uses 167 plastic water bottles per year! Just think how many plastic bottles would have to be made worldwide‌ After that, these thousands and thousands of plastic water bottles are taken to a bottling plant where they are filled with all the water they need, these are then transported by lorries to many supermarkets such as Asda and Tesco in the UK. Next you might go into the supermarket and buy one or two for a trip. Just know that if there is no bin around, it doesn’t hurt to just hold onto your bottle for a little longer until you find a recycling bin. You may wonder, why does everyone say recycling is important? Well if you do recycle your plastic bottles, they can be reused and made into other items such as carpets and fleeces. However, if you choose not to recycle it, those plastic bottles could end up in the sea where they could affect the lives of many animals, from them getting stuck or being swallowed, or they could add to the 700 acres of landfills which are emitting harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere.
6
United Space School at NASA By Tori Weston, U6 TXD Over the summer I was selected as the English representative for United Space School 2019. This two week internship with NASA in Houston, Texas gathers together 50 students from 25 different countries to plan a manned mission to Mars. After a competitive entry process of a 3000 word essay and an hour long Skype interview, I was awarded a place on the programme. On day one, and while most of the students were still jet lagged having literally flown in from the four corners of the globe, we had another series of interviews designed to separate the 50 students into 5 teams of 10, with each team having a specific responsibility and specialist area of the mission. I was lucky enough to be assigned to the blue team whose focus was on Mars Surface Operations and was subsequently elected captain. Following team assignments, we had a whole group debate on some key mission parameters such as duration and purpose of the mission along with the number of crew and rough landing zone. This would get everyone on the same page before planning started. Then we had to learn, utilising the programme’s deep roots within the NASA community. It has access to some of the highest ranked people within the agency who came in and gave us talks on everything from Space Laws and Politics to the best materials for radiation shielding, to the ECLSS (Environmental Control and Life Support System) where our speaker John Graf brought in the used CO₂ removal canisters from the Apollo 11 mission. To aid us in our research we were given unrestricted access to the NASA archives which document the entire history of the USA space programme from before it was even called NASA We were also lucky enough to have a Skype session with renowned astronaut Chris Hadfield to answer all of our burning questions about life in the space programme. The group then spent a day at Mission Control Houston, the same site the moon landing was coordinated from. We were given behind the scenes access to the space shuttle avionics facility and the
7
life size earthbound model of the ISS, as well as a tour of the neutral buoyancy lab where astronauts were training for a spacewalk at the time. We then had the chance to see the preserved piece of history at Mission Control the Saturn V rocket built for Apollo 18. The 120m tall rocket was built and scheduled to fly in summer 1973, but funding was cut after Apollo 17. The only part never assembled was the crew capsule so on display is the charred one from Apollo 17 after re-entry. The rocket has since been pulled apart, fuel tanks emptied, and explosives removed. The shell of the rocket still remains and it could fly today if it was fuelled. This was the first time I had truly grasped just how immense of a scale the space industry works on, and how much it can inspire. On day ten we presented a rough pitch to a small panel of experts who would listen, and then highlight all the problems and holes in our reasoning. This was a harrowing experience for all the teams as the criticism was often harsh and to the point leaving our nerves a little frayed and our stress a little too high. The rest of the day was spent frantically trying to fix everything before final presentations. On the penultimate day we had to present our final project. A 20 minute presentation followed by an intense ten minutes of questions defending our pitch in front of the audience of NASA experts. Blue was up first with me as the opening speaker. It was my job to outline the team, explain the choice of landing site, possible EVA’s on the surface and scientific experiments to be carried out. I also had to address the elephant in the room, why should we go to Mars in the first place. It was one of the most challenging experiences of my life! On my final day at Space School we had our graduation ceremony with our keynote speaker, astronaut Bill McArthur telling us how inspiring it is to see the younger generation as excited about space as he was during the moon missions. He highlighted what an exciting time for space travel we are living in today, as the private space tourism industry emerges, humans will return to the moon in 2024 under the Artemis programme, and a manned mission to Mars is finally looking realistic, but we still don’t know if it will be public or private. United Space School was a life changing experience for me, I have grown as a person, as a leader and my enthusiasm for the space programme has increased more than I thought possible. And I would fully encourage anyone with a passion for space to apply for space school next summer.
8
The Ethics of Human-Animal Embryos By Shalini Sellam, U5 Aleph We’ve all heard the debate on stem cells and discarded embryos - should we protect them to save a life, or use them for research to save even more? - yet it seems this question may have to give way to another; one that fifty years ago, nobody would have seen coming. Animals and humans are two separate species: but what if they weren’t? A chimera is a human-animal hybrid. Scientists have not created these yet, nor do they intend to, but what they have come up with is called a cytoplasmic hybrid embryo. It is created by injecting a human nucleus into an animal embryo and is kept alive for 14 days for research purposes. In a cell, there are two types of DNA; most of it is stored in the nucleus, while some is found as mitochondrial DNA, therefore these embryos are 99% human, biologically, and since May 2008, legally considered humans. Now this research on its own could be considered in the same vein as stem cell research: opposed by some for religious and ethical reasons, but altogether in support of humanity and continuing scientific research. However, this strand of bioethics involves cross species combinations. Many are outraged at what scientists believe is acceptable, and many more are worried as to how this will escalate in the near future. The main reason for the opposition is, as expected, the idea of “playing God”. These beings are essentially motherless, created solely for the benefit of science, and while this may seem like a step towards saving lives (such as researching cures for genetic disorders), many religious bodies have expressed their concern. It seems wrong to create these embryos and not allow them to grow into proper humans – thus denying them the chance at a full life. As well as this, the idea of combining species may look unnatural. Many argue it doesn’t take both human and animal rights into account.
9
“…the creation of an animal-human being represents a natural border that has been violated…” --President of the Pontifical Academy for Life
And surely, we cannot say that this research will never escalate into something more uncontrollable? The very nature of science is to always be growing, changing, developing our ideas. Currently, scientists claim these embryos will be used for research only. Research, though, can take different definitions; in years, these foundations could be used to engineer actual chimeras, combine human and animal DNA, create whole new species which could rebalance the world as we know it. Different species have different strengths – but if we can share these genes, who knows what might come along? People should consider the paths this research could take- delving into an ethical grey area, something is likely to go wrong. Of course, these reasons are legitimate concerns. On the other hand, we should switch our focus to what scientific research is meant for: to gain a better understanding of the world we live in. Scientists argue that the embryo will never
Imagine where we would be if scientific progress was inhibited now, or imagine where we would be if it had never been inhibited in the past. become an animal, human, or chimera, and so is not infringing on human rights or otherwise. This research will further stem cell research, as these embryos can be harvested creating a larger abundancy of stem cells. Eggs could no longer be needed for research, which would actually quash some moral concerns, and so this could be a gateway to more efficient and controllable experimentation. We should trust the scientists, mathematicians, doctors and engineers who seem to hold our very being in their latex gloves. Imagine where we would be if scientific progress was inhibited now, or imagine where we would be if it had never been inhibited in the past. It could be a different world. People are curious, and if these embryos are simply helping and not hurting, we should support every ounce of progress. And of course, a majority of MPs have ruled that this research is allowed. It may not be something you’ve thought about, but what really is the relationship between human and animal life? After all, we evolved from apes. The lines between species and genes have always been blurred. Should we cross them to explore what we can find, or stay on either side, and trust that lines were drawn for good reason? For now, we can only watch and see. Maybe in the future we will have a whole new species – or maybe we could find something totally different.
10
The genetic breakthrough of CRISPR-how it has the potential to change humanity forever By Mathujana Thirunavukkarasu, U5 A The four letters A, C, T and G represent the molecules that form our deoxyribonucleic acid, which modifies who we are from the moment of conception. Only 66 years ago, Watson and Crick discovered the complex structure of DNA, and for just over a decade, we have known all the letters in our DNA, and despite discovering small genetic adaptions to deleterious mutations, such as Alzheimer’s disease, only now have we found a method to directly edit DNA. Less than half a century ago, it was believed computers would take over everything, such as shopping and the stock market. Similarly, CRISPR-Cas 9 has the potential to change all of humanity forever. CRISPR is the acronym for “Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats�. Put simply, scientists recognise the genome causing the health problem, to be able to create a specific guide-RNA, which is then attached to the DNA cutting enzyme, Cas 9, and finally introduced to the target cells. It locates the target letter sequence and cuts the DNA. Then, scientists edit the existing genome by modifying, deleting, or inserting new sequences, similar to the way we use spell check on Microsoft Word, for example. Whilst CRISPR has not only been able to shrink tumours in mice carrying human prostate cancer and liver cancer cells, it has also been able to cure HIV from a living organism, proving how successful this tool has already been. Additionally, the system has the ability for editing reproductive/germline cells which could be remarkably beneficial for discovering diseases at an early stage. This would mean any changes made in the cells, will be passed on from generation to generation. It is hugely controversial, more so than genome editing in somatic cells, (any cell of a living organism other than reproductive cells) which is ethically accepted due to the balance between benefits and risks. Whereas, editing germline cells brings up many ethical challenges.
11
One issue is that consent can easily be asked from an adult about making changes, but this is not the case with an embryo or its future offspring. Therefore, how can we justly, even attempt, editing these genomes, whilst it remains non-consensual and will most probably genetically alter all embryos from then on? The most significant argument of using CRISPR on embryos, carried on from the first problem is, ‘where do the changes stop?’ In other words, would it be permissible to enhance normal human traits, e.g. height, hair colour or intelligence? Although it gives freedom of being able to choose brown hair and blue eyes, is it right to choose the appearance of a human? Unfortunately, there is not a ‘yes or no’ answer when asking if it is acceptable to make changes to the cells however, it must essentially come down to opinions as well as sometimes accepting risks have to be made, to be able to see the benefits.
The system has the ability for editing reproductive/germline cells which could be remarkably beneficial for discovering diseases at an early stage. Whilst CRISPR does bring controversial conversations to the table, it is certainly one of the first revolutions to genetic engineering. At the same time, there is still so much knowledge about this technology that we don’t know about and it requires being careful as it could eventually lead to the extinction of species, if not taken care of properly. Although gene editing in reproductive cells is currently illegal in the UK and many other countries, it will most likely only be a few years until it is started to be routinely used on humans. Presently, there is nothing stopping scientists in countries such as China, editing embryos, therefore, in a couple of centuries, it is more than likely for designer babies to be created using this method. Overtime, CRISPR will develop all over the world and not only change the humans on the planet but also the environment, consequently, changing humanity forever.
12
STEM Enrichment Book/film/podcast recommendations Whilst we’re taught science at school, there’s so much more to learn and discover outside the classroom. Here’s a selection of what some of us at Science and Engineering Society have been enjoying recently!
Books/Magazines
Films
13
Podcasts/Radio
TV/Documentaries
14
Placebos- A Violation of Trust? By Sarannia Ragulan, U5 Aleph Is medicine the only way to cure illnesses? For decades, the answer has been proved to be no - though it still isn’t widely believed. Time, and time again, the power of our subconscious mind has been proven to be more than capable of curing many illnesses our body faces. However, it takes a great deal of self-will, strength and determination for this to happen. And this is where ‘The Placebo Effect’ comes in.
We are growing up in a world where pharmacy and medicine are fast growing sectors in industry, with people being extremely dependent on medicine - in fact, overestimating the power of it. I am, by no means, denying that medicine can be very useful - just that there is a more effective cure than this. In 1957, a Stage 4 cancer patient, Mr Wright, after miraculously recovering from Stage 4 cancer a first time, repeated this miracle a second time, only after being injected with distilled water, which he was told by his doctor, Dr West, to be a newly created drug which would nearly definitely cure him. Unfortunately, 2 months later, upon finding that this ‘drug’ wasn’t actually effective, cancer came back to him, and having lost all hope, it took him at last. This story, along with so many others, are all examples of The Placebo Effect. And although, this may seem to be the ultimate cure to all illnesses to some of you, to others, it may seem to be unethical. Not unethical in the sense that The Placebo Effect is ineffective or harmful to the body; it is not uncommon for this to be used by doctors and it also reduces the likelihood of any undesirable side effects. Some people see the receiving of a placebo effect as dishonest on the doctor’s part. They see this type of treatment to be a violation on the right of a patient expecting to be fully informed about their treatment. This view has caused a lot of controversy regarding the issue of placebo treatments. A very effective treatment, with quite a high success rate, yet also seen to be dishonest - a breach of honesty in a doctor-patient relationship. Some believe that placebos should only be used if the patient is aware of this and has given their consent to it. This regulation is followed by the AMA, the American Medical Association:
15
“Physicians may use [a] placebo for diagnosis or treatment only if the
Some people see this type of treatment to be a violation on the right of a patient expecting to be fully informed about their treatment. patient is informed of and agrees to its use.”
This may seem to contradict the concept behind a placebo, but it doesn’t have to deteriorate the patient’s recovery. The idea of being treated and tended to by a doctor will have very similar effects, on the patient, to the placebo. However, if this disclosure is kept continuously, it may lead to a decrease in the rate and effectiveness of the patient’s recovery, along with the placebo effect starting to disappear. Those in favour of the placebo, may say that the idea of an placebo manipulating a patient’s thoughts and ideas of their treatment is actually overstated. The complete honesty between a doctor and patient doesn’t ever result in the patient’s recovery influenced by nothing but the treatment. The doctor always has an effect on the patient’s recovery along the bio-psychosocial continuum. They do this through their personality, speech, body language and other factors. Keeping this in mind, the placebo therefore can be seen only as a deception of the patient’s trust in their doctor if one looks at it as purely a biomedical pursuit. After having looked at both the favourable and unfavourable effects of the placebo, I believe that as long as it is used purely as a method of diagnosis or treatment, the placebo effect isn’t in any way unethical and can result in a greater recovery of a patient than even expected.
16
The Problem with Anti-Vaxxers By Ella Broomberg, U6 DT ‘Anti-vaxxer’ is the term coined for people who are opposed to vaccinations because, ultimately, they do more harm than good. They disparage medical professionals and scientific research that demonstrates the benefits and safety of such medications and take an active stand by refusing to vaccinate themselves or their children.
The early 21st century saw a spike in refusal of the MMR vaccine, following the release of a study by Andrew Wakefield in 1998. It stated that there was a link between the triple vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella, and autism. This led to widespread panic, and vaccination rates dropped from 90% to 79% in 2003. This study has since been disproven by an investigation, involving over 600,000 children, which concluded that the vaccine does not increase the risk of developing autism, nor does it trigger the disorder. Many put their distrust of vaccinations down to their own bad experiences. In a video made by ‘Jubilee Media’, one woman describes how she became arthritic in her hands in college after receiving a vaccine, while another tells the story of her daughter developing epilepsy for which she blames her vaccinations. As with any medical procedure, vaccination does come with risks, but these are very low. For example, there is a 1 in 100,000 risk of anaphylaxis (allergic reaction) to the vaccine; this is often due to an egg allergy, and the nurse administering the vaccine will check for this to minimise the risk. No vaccination would be distributed to the public if its side effects had not been tested for, and however significant you consider the risks, the benefits are evident through outbreaks that have occurred in recent years. Whilst 1996 saw fewer than 100 cases of measles in the UK, there were over 2000 laboratory-confirmed cases in 2012, which coincides with the wave of children not vaccinated following the 1998 scare. There are 3 reasons why this ‘revolution’ is a problem for the health and future of our population: kids are at risk; herd immunity is threatened; and vaccination could lead to eradication. 1. Kids are at risk. This rise in anti-vaccination is being seen primarily in parents refusing to get their children vaccinated. Spending so much of their time around
17
other children, they are at high risk to contract a disease, as well as pass it on to others. In the case of measles, the effects of the disease don’t just stop at a fever and rash; in extreme cases, usually in infants and the elderly, it can cause pneumonia, brain swelling and deafness. 2. Herd immunity is threatened. As well as protecting individuals, vaccination has the benefits of also protecting those who cannot be vaccinated. This could be because they are immunocompromised from cancer treatments or other diseases (e.g. HIV/ AIDS) or have had previous reactions to vaccines. If you are unable to become infected, because your immune system is able to fight the pathogen, you are much less likely to pass it on to others who could be more greatly affected by the disease. This is called herd immunity. Each disease requires a different percentage of a population to be effectively vaccinated to produce herd immunity. This is calculated from a value called R0, which indicates how infectious a disease is. For example, polio has an R0 of 6, while the value for measles is 15. This means they require an 83% and 94% vaccination rate, respectively to protect those more vulnerable.
18
3. Vaccination could lead to eradication. The first major example of this is the famous case taught in your Biology lessons of Edward Jenner. He vaccinated susceptible individuals by introducing them to the less harmful cow pox virus, as a method to protect them from the potentially fatal small pox disease. Through global vaccination schemes, the disease has been eradicated from humans, with the last natural case in 1977. Some say there is the same hope for measles. Since the introduction of the MMR vaccine, the number of cases of measles, mumps and rubella has fallen by over 98% in England and Wales. The same cannot be said for countries such as India and Guinea, which have suffered recent outbreaks, but as healthcare systems, infrastructure and education improve, the statistics will follow the same trends as in the UK. Once eradicated, there is no need for the vaccine at all, as there is no threat from the pathogen.
Once eradicated, there is no need for the vaccine at all, as there is no threat from the pathogen. I hope these obvious advantages encourage you to stay up to date with your vaccinations and have armed you with some vital information to shut down the next anti-vaxxer you meet because, while they are the problem, we are all part of the solution.
19
Visit to the UCLO in Mill Hill By Emma Bernholt, U4 Aesc One cold and clear Friday night in February, I visited University College London Observatory in Mill Hill. They’re the domes you pass on your way to Brent Cross. First, we were given a overview of the history of the observatory. It opened in 1929, because in 1925 UCL was offered the Allen telescope and needed a place to use it. We next visited one of the twin Celestron C14 telescopes, bought in 2010. We saw how the computer software moves the telescope and dome to the position needed to see the planets and the stars.
The Radcliffe has 2 different telescopes on the same base; it is huge and weighs 11 tonnes! We then saw the Radcliffe. Built in 1901, it moved to the Observatory in 1938. The Radcliffe has 2 different telescopes on the same base. One takes images, and the other is used ‘hand-and-eye’. It is huge and weighs 11 tonnes. This telescope is stored in the biggest dome. You can only change its direction by hand as it’s so old! However, if you can’t reach the eyepiece then you can move the floor up! Finally we visited the Fry, which was made in 1862 and donated to the observatory in 1930. I really enjoyed this part of the visit, as we were allowed to observe the moon which is a very rare experience. The part of the moon we focused on had a large crater, as an asteroid had smashed it. I loved looking at the moon so closely as I was able to see all the fine detail. I learnt that some students in 2014 discovered a supernova (death of a star) which had already been there for a week but no one had noticed! I really enjoyed the visit and would highly recommend it to anyone even if you are not interested in the topic of space as it’s really fascinating.
20
Autonomous Vehicles By Helena Loan, U6 AHS Autonomous vehicles are modes of transport that run completely independently of human input, able to move around by sensing the environment and reacting appropriately. There are different stages of automation ranging from complete human control to an autonomous system having full control. There are many cars currently on the market, such as the Skoda X to the Mercedes C Class Saloon, that have autonomous features, ranging from lane guidance and automatic breaking to self-parking. However, none of these vehicles are truly autonomous, only partially automated. Now companies are developing algorithms to make the car fully autonomous, however they also need to work out how the vehicle will deal with the ethical choices it has to make. The ‘trolley problem’ is a thought experiment which represents this issue. It is the idea that were a trolley to roll down a track and be unstoppable, would it be more ethical to let fate take its course and allow five people to die or to intervene and sacrifice the life of one person. With human drivers this problem doesn’t occur but with autonomous vehicles they need to be programmed to drive and so the decision is actually planned out. This means that the companies manufacturing the cars are actually being given the responsibility of judging who should live or die. Autonomous cars are a clever idea because they take away the responsibility of driving from a human, which relieves us from “human error” accidents that occur, for example when the driver is tired or distracted. A report by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2008 showed that 85% of all crashes were due to human error, while the faster processing speed of a computer over a person could reduce reaction time and therefore reduce stopping distance, which could help to prevent serious injuries. Numerous sensors are needed to make sure that the car can properly assess the environment and avoid any collisions, and this explains why ‘many autonomous car developers use multiple sensors in their test cars—optical sensors, radars, LiDAR, and ultrasonic sensors’ (Tweedt, 2017). Many cars already have GPS (used in the Satnav to help drivers to get to their destination), ultrasonic sensors (which are used in self-
21
parking) and a few even have radar (where radio waves are sent out and then reflected off objects so the car can pinpoint its location, used for cruise control in some vehicles) and optical sensors (to keep the cars within their lane). Two types of sensors commonly only used in prototypes could greatly help autonomous cars navigate their surroundings. Firstly an advanced version of an optical sensor could enable the car to see traffic lights, so it could actually stop at a red light. LiDAR would also be useful because it is much more accurate than other sensors: it has a higher resolution than other sensors, such as radar, and so it creates a clearer picture of the world around it, meaning it can distinguish between different objects. However LiDAR does have its problems too because it at the moment it cannot recognize cyclists very well which means that there is a high risk of an automated car just driving into a cyclist. More testing is required to work out the best combination of sensors for automated cars and to develop the sensors so that they can work well.
A report by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in 2008 showed that 85% of all crashes were due to human error. Ultimately I think that autonomous cars have the potential to greatly benefit society and the environment because they allow time to be spent more wisely, by reducing congestion which would also decrease CO2 emissions and for people who can’t drive cars they would be able to travel independently. However their success doesn’t just rely upon the creation of technology but also relies upon being considered safe, not only to physically drive but also from being hacked, which could have serious consequences ranging from drivers having their data stolen to cyber terrorism. Although it is unlikely any manufacturer would give a guarantee that a car was totally safe, the risk must be seen as negligible or at least significantly less than a human driver. It is hard to trust an autonomous vehicle, simply because a passenger has to give up all sense of control which is something everyone resents. The expectation is that autonomous vehicles will be prevalent in our world by 2035, providing they overcome these challenges, so we’ll just have to wait and see.
22
Photo entry competition
Roxana Ghaarachorloo L5 Aleph
23
Nicola Marett
U5 Alpha
Winner
24
Margi Barot L5 Aesc
Deborah Smith U6 TXD
25
Quiz 1.
Who was the first Brit into space?
2.
Which planet in our solar system has 53 moons?
3.
What type of bridge is the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco?
4.
Pneumatics is the branch of engineering that focuses on what?
5.
What is the name of the first satellite sent into space?
6.
What is the name of the largest part of the human brain?
7.
At room temperature, which is the only metal which takes liquid form?
8.
Which part of the body is able to regenerate itself?
9.
Which fossil fuel is found and used in its solid state?
10.
What type of blood cells defend our bodies against illnesses?
Answers 1-Ecosystem, 2-Microbiome, 3-Vagus nerve, 4-Pulmonary artery, 5-Life cycle, 6-Embryo, 7-Chimera, 8Stem cells, 9-CRISPR, 10-Genetic engineering, 11-Placebo, 12-Vaccine, 13-Herd immunity, 14Autonomous Crossword: 1-Helen Sharman, 2-Saturn, 3-Suspension bridge, 4-Mechanical properties of gases/pressurised air, 5Sputnik, 6-The cerebrum , 7-Mercury, 8-The liver, 9-Coal, 10-White Blood Cells Quiz:
26
Crossword
For access to the online crossword, use this link: https://crosswordlabs.com/view/spark-crossword
27
Crossword Clues 1) 2)
3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9)
10) 11) 12) 13)
14)
A community of living organisms in conjunction with the nonliving components of their environment The genetic material of all the microbes that live on and inside the human body A nerve that transmits information between the gut and the brain Carries deoxygenated blood from the right ventricle to the lungs A series of ordered events happening to a living organism An early stage of development of a multicellular organism A human-animal hybrid Human cells that can develop into many different cell types A technology that can be used to edit genes. A family of DNA sequences found in the genomes of prokaryotic organisms such as bacteria and archaea. The process of using recombinant DNA technology to alter the genetic makeup of an organism A medicine or procedure prescribed for the psychological benefit to the patient rather than for any physiological effect. A ___ helps the body’s immune system to recognize and fight pathogens like viruses or bacteria ___ is a form of indirect protection from infectious disease that occurs when a large percentage of a population has become immune to an infection A vehicle that runs completely independently of human input is ___
28
This publication has been produced by students at Haberdashers’ Aske’s School for Girls. Many thanks go to Nicola Percy and Rachell Fox, without whom this publication would not be possible.
